Evaluating User Vulnerability to Privacy Disclosures over Online Dating Platforms

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 612)

Abstract

In recent times, Online Social Networks (OSNs) have gained immense popularity among users of all age groups, particularly the young. Due to their widespread popularity and engagement, we are observing a rapid rise in the number of OSNs and the wide variety of services (or ecosystem) that they offer. However, at the same time, there are growing concerns about availability, visibility and leakage of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) of users on these OSNs. In this paper, we focus our attention on the OSNs which offer dating services. In dating OSNs, users typically don’t reveal their true identities in their profiles. In our work, we first propose a framework to extract user’s PII through targeted intelligent conversations. Subsequently, we present detailed evaluation of vulnerability of users to PII disclosures. Our field study on 100 users validates the claim that these users are extremely vulnerable to PII disclosures.

Keywords

PII leakage Online social networks 

References

  1. 1.
    Alassiri, A.A., et al.: Usage of social networking sites and technological impact on interaction enabling features. Int. J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 4(4), 46–61 (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tait, S., Jeske, D.: Hello stranger! Trust and self-disclosure effects on online information sharing. Int. J. Cyber Behav. Psychol. Learn. 5(1), 42–55 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Utz, S., Krmer, N.C.: The privacy paradox on social network sites revisited: the role of individual characteristics and group norms. Cyberpsychol. J. Psychosoc. Res. Cyberspace 3(2) (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fire, M., Goldschmidt, R., Elovici, Y.: Online social networks: threats and solutions. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 16(4), 2019–2036 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marwick, A.E., Boyd, D.: Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media Soc. 16(7), 1051–1067 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Algarni, A., Yue, X.: Social engineering in social networking sites: phase-based and source-based models. Int. J. e-Education e-Business e-Management e-Learning 3(6), 456 (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reynolds, B., et al.: Sharing ephemeral information in online social networks: privacy perceptions and behaviours. In: IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gibbs, J.L., Ellison, N.B., Lai, C.-H.: First comes love, then comes Google: a investigation of uncertainty reduction strategies and self-disclosure in online dating. Commun. Res. 38, 70–100 (2010). Article No. 0093650210377091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Toma, C.L., Hancock, J.T.: Looks and lies: the role of physical attractiveness in online dating self-presentation and deception. Commun. Res. (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Young, A.L., Quan-Haase, A.: Information revelation and internet privacy concerns on social network sites: a case study of Facebook. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Communities and Technologies. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tuunainen, V.K., Pitknen, O., Hovi, M.: Users’ awareness of privacy on online social networking sites-case Facebook. In: Bled 2009 Proceedings, p. 42 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Urista, M.A., Dong, Q., Day, K.D.: Explaining why young adults use MySpace and Facebook through uses and gratifications theory. Hum. Commun. 12(2), 215–229 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thelwall, M.: Social networks, gender, and friending: an analysis of MySpace member profiles. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59(8), 1321–1330 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barnes, S.B.: A privacy paradox: social networking in the United States. First Monday 11(9) (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Giani, A., Berk, V.H., Cybenko, G.V.: Data exfiltration and covert channels. In: Defense and Security Symposium. International Society for Optics and Photonics (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brock, T.C., Becker, L.A.: Debriefing and susceptibility to subsequent experimental manipulations. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2(3), 314–323 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indira Gandhi Delhi Technical University for WomenDelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations